I will never for the life of me understand why people look to this erhman guy His arguments are no better than a 13 year old teenager making anti-christian Instagram posts in 2010. Literal day 1 apologetics refutes every point ive ever heard from him. If he came out and said hes never actually read the gospels and relies on tiktok posts for arguments id absolutely believe him
Jim Wallace at Cold Case Christianity explains beautifully why Luke is before the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple, and he writes about deaths of people like James (brother of John) and Stephen, but not Peter, Paul, or James (the brother of Jesus). So Luke was around 43 AD and Mark was before that. Acts was shortly after Luke, and also before these events.
The problems with population estimates is that especially in Palestine. These are very busy sites; these areas have been actively being used so the size of the town can expand and shrink over time. then most homes may be mostly wood, so it was going to be difficult to get the number people living there. Note these are the same people who did not believe that King David existed
No Bart is not to be trusted he is very biased. He comes to conclusions on rather flimsy arguments and depending on the audience he changes his position. His purely academic books are much more reasonable but of course no one reads them.
@@atheistskeptic8748 But he is an academic who is supposed to use rigorous arguments to support his positions which he does in his scholastic books but fail to do in his more public books and debates. So, he seems a little deceptive.
@@midnightwatchman1 Yes I get because he is an atheist you are going to have your bias unscholarly opinion on him. How often do you show the same criticism to Christian scholars? WLC for example who openly said he lowers his standards for a god than he does for other claim
@@midnightwatchman1 Also to mention your lack of understanding scholarly works and public works. We can look at Sean McDowells scholarly work vs his published book on the martyrdom of the disciples. His scholarly works are vastly more detailed and extremely rigorous with extremely large words and deeper dives into complex topics. His book is an easy read with not a very deep dive into complex topics and arguments are a bit flimsy. Why? Well because he is trying to sell a book and make money and not that many people are going to buy it if they have to read a college distortion. Also he is getting the basic information out to lay-people who probably aren’t going to fully understand his more complex scholarly works. It’s not that he is being deceptive it’s work for 2 completely different audiences
_"Did The historical Jesus Actually walk This earth."_ Nope. There is literally no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus ever existed. 1. None of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus. 2. In the entire first century Jesus is not mentioned by a single historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher, or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, carving, sculpture, or monument and is never found in a single piece of private correspondence or official record. 3. Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, tombs, dwellings, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts.
@@EvilXtianityyet has many texts about him for the period. there is a delay to get writings on other important figures of the time. Not sure this is the angle to try. Why not just say his supernatural activity is not observed in people's lives, I think it was made up or something?
@@EvilXtianity scholars agree that Jesus was a guy that lived, he was crucified by the Romans, and authors record claims that people saw him after. Those are the historical facts that have been established. Where you go from there is the point of the debate here
From what I understand, the authorship of Luke is connected to that of Acts. And Acts strongly suggest Luke was the author.
I will never for the life of me understand why people look to this erhman guy
His arguments are no better than a 13 year old teenager making anti-christian Instagram posts in 2010.
Literal day 1 apologetics refutes every point ive ever heard from him.
If he came out and said hes never actually read the gospels and relies on tiktok posts for arguments id absolutely believe him
He's overhyped fool promoted by leftist propaganda and they use his nonsense to attack Christianity
Jim Wallace at Cold Case Christianity explains beautifully why Luke is before the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple, and he writes about deaths of people like James (brother of John) and Stephen, but not Peter, Paul, or James (the brother of Jesus). So Luke was around 43 AD and Mark was before that. Acts was shortly after Luke, and also before these events.
The problems with population estimates is that especially in Palestine. These are very busy sites; these areas have been actively being used so the size of the town can expand and shrink over time. then most homes may be mostly wood, so it was going to be difficult to get the number people living there. Note these are the same people who did not believe that King David existed
What a relief to hear someone who can tell us where Jesus went wrong… or not. Really?
bart theory is that Luke and his audience was stupid and that Luke basically a liar
Bart theory is 21st century people living in America know better about 1st century people living in palestine
You can see the resurrected Christ speaking right now.
Look jesus trône 🚽💩👈
No Bart is not to be trusted he is very biased. He comes to conclusions on rather flimsy arguments and depending on the audience he changes his position. His purely academic books are much more reasonable but of course no one reads them.
Comes to conclusion on rather flimsy arguments? Barts not a Christian
@@atheistskeptic8748 But he is an academic who is supposed to use rigorous arguments to support his positions which he does in his scholastic books but fail to do in his more public books and debates. So, he seems a little deceptive.
@@midnightwatchman1 Yes I get because he is an atheist you are going to have your bias unscholarly opinion on him. How often do you show the same criticism to Christian scholars? WLC for example who openly said he lowers his standards for a god than he does for other claim
@@midnightwatchman1 Also to mention your lack of understanding scholarly works and public works. We can look at Sean McDowells scholarly work vs his published book on the martyrdom of the disciples. His scholarly works are vastly more detailed and extremely rigorous with extremely large words and deeper dives into complex topics. His book is an easy read with not a very deep dive into complex topics and arguments are a bit flimsy. Why? Well because he is trying to sell a book and make money and not that many people are going to buy it if they have to read a college distortion. Also he is getting the basic information out to lay-people who probably aren’t going to fully understand his more complex scholarly works. It’s not that he is being deceptive it’s work for 2 completely different audiences
@@atheistskeptic8748 His pop books are " easy reads" to the point of being deceptive. lying to people is not acceptable
Good Bart / Bad Bart
Hahahaha
“Simpson”
_"Did The historical Jesus Actually walk This earth."_
Nope.
There is literally no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus ever existed.
1. None of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus.
2. In the entire first century Jesus is not mentioned by a single historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher, or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, carving, sculpture, or monument and is never found in a single piece of private correspondence or official record.
3. Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, tombs, dwellings, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts.
Wrong about everything
@@ElijahZielke
_"Wrong about everything."_
That's not a serious reply.
Cite a specific assertion you disagree with and your reasoning.
@@EvilXtianityyet has many texts about him for the period. there is a delay to get writings on other important figures of the time. Not sure this is the angle to try. Why not just say his supernatural activity is not observed in people's lives, I think it was made up or something?
@@RavenShinyThings
_"...has many texts about him for the period."_
Contemporaneous? By witnesses?
Cite an example.
@@EvilXtianity scholars agree that Jesus was a guy that lived, he was crucified by the Romans, and authors record claims that people saw him after. Those are the historical facts that have been established.
Where you go from there is the point of the debate here